Open Stack

On 4/8/2016 5:54 PM, Jay Faulkner wrote:
> I know a lot of folks explicitly avoid a +0 vote with a comment because
> you don't get "credit" for it in statistics. Whether or not that should
> matter is another discussion, but there is a significant disincentive to
> no-voting right now.
>
>
> -
>
> Jay Faulkner
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Dolph Mathews <dolph.mathews at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, April 8, 2016 1:54 PM
> *To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> *Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the
> Stackalytics stats
>
>
> On Friday, April 8, 2016, John Dickinson <me at not.mn <mailto:me at not.mn>>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>     On 8 Apr 2016, at 13:35, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
>
>      > On 2016-04-08 19:42:18 +0200 (+0200), Dmitry Tantsur wrote:
>      >> There are many ways to game a simple +1 counter, such as +1'ing
>     changes
>      >> that already have at least 1x +2, or which already approved, or
>     which need
>      >> rechecking...
>      > [...]
>      >
>      > The behavior which baffles me, and also seems to be on the rise
>      > lately, is random +1 votes on changes whose commit messages and/or
>      > status clearly indicate they should not merged and do not need to be
>      > reviewed. I suppose that's another an easy way to avoid the dreaded
>      > "disagreements" counter?
>      > --
>      > Jeremy Stanley
>
>
>     I have been told that some OpenStack on boarding teaches new members
>     of the community to do reviews. And they say, effectively, "muddle
>     through as you can. You won't understand it all at first, but do
>     your best. When you're done, add a +1 and move to the next one"
>
>
> I advocate for basically this, but instead of a +1, leave a +0 and ask
> questions. The new reviewer will inevitably learn something and the
> author will benefit by explaining their change (teaching is the best way
> to learn).
>
>
>     I've been working to correct this when I've seen it, but +1 reviews
>     with no comments might not be people trying to game. It might simply
>     be people trying to get involved that don't know any better yet.
>
>     --John
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>

There is also disincentive in +1ing a change that you don't understand 
and is wrong and then a core comes along and -1s it (you get dinged for 
the disagreement). And there is disincentive in -1ing a change for the 
wrong reasons (silly nits or asking questions for understanding). I ask 
a lot of questions in a lot of changes and I don't vote on those because 
it would be inappropriate.

I also notice when "newcomers" are asking good questions for 
understanding and not voting on them, it shows me they are trying to 
learn and are getting invested in the project, not just trying to pad 
stats. Those are the people we look to mentor into bigger roles in the 
project team, be that working on subteams or eventually looking at for 
the core reviewer team.

-- 

Thanks,

Matt Riedemann